Re: [SG] GMS vs. Infantry

At 4:21 PM +0000 7/19/02, Richard Kirke wrote:
>Firing GMS at non point targets.. hmm, well if soldiers do it, then 
>I guess there shoudl be some rules for it.
>
>I get the feeling that they should really be fired at point targets 
>for example pill-boxes, machine-gun nests etc, and be considered as 
>static vehicles (maybe 12" range bands, a shift for cover or 
>something) then treat the ocupants as carried infantry (page 39, top 
>right). If fired at infantry sqads, I'd say limit to 1 casualty, 
>give it a really low FP (maybe D4) and if he is hit, then he is 
>automatically hit (because lets face it, if a soldier is hit by a 
>Milan Rocket, then he is not going to survive, not noway-no-how!

Well, really what you are doing is getting an area effect against the 
point target. The result of an HEAT round is that yes, you do get an 
armor penetrating jet, but you also have a very significant explosive 
area around the detonation. This is exactly why the 120mm smoothbore 
guns retain an anti personnel ability despite not being optimized for 
it.

Its not as effective against a dispersed target. But against a crew 
manning a MG or a sniper in a obvious position, it works wonders.
-- 
  Ryan Gill		 rmgill@SPAMmindspring.com
----------------------------------------------------------
      |        |		   |	     -==----	  
      | O--=-  |		   |	    /_8[*]°_\	   
      |_/|o|_\_|       | _________ |	    /_[===]_\	  
      / 00DA61 \       |/---------\|	 __/	     \--- 
   _w/|=_[__]_= \w_    // [_]  o[]\\   _oO_\	     /_O|_ 
  |: O(4) ==	O :|  _Oo\=======/_O_  |____\	    /____| 
  |---\________/---|  [__O_______W__]	|x||_\	   /_||x|  
   |s|\        /|s|   |s|/BSV 575\|s|	|x|-\|	   |/-|x|  
   |s|=\______/=|s|   |s|=|_____|=|s|	|x|--|_____|--|x|  
   |s|		|s|   |s|	  |s|	|x|	      |x|  
  '60 Daimler Ferret '42 Daimler Dingo '42 Humber MkIV (1/3)